Earlier this year, the BC Legislature declared the Pacific Salmon to be BC’s official fish.  Which is no doubt nice for the salmon.  But even nicer would be real legal protection for the salmon.  With the platforms from all four parties now available, what are candidates proposing to do to protect our salmon? This post examines where each of the four main parties come down, including taking a look at growing controversy about the NDP’s rather vague election promise on salmon.

The BC New Democratic Party released its election platform on Wednesday (April 24th), the last of the four main parties to release its platform. What? You don’t have time to read yet another election platform?  Well today is your lucky day, because this environmental law alert summarizes the platforms of the NDP, the Liberals, the Greens and the Conservatives into 4 handy, easy to look at word clouds.

Tools and resources that raise environmental issues in the context of an election are always of interest over here at the West Coast Environmental Law Association.  So we thought we’d direct our readers to two new tools: VoteEnvironment2013 and the CBC Vote Compass. 

Well, the writ’s been dropped and this Environmental Law Alert post is brought to you by the West Coast Environmental Law Association, sponsor under the Elections Act.  We do understand the value of regulating advertising that is intended to sway elections, but the BC Elections Act is prohibiting communications on broad public issues based not on whether those communications are intended to impact the election, but on whether the parties and candidates have taken positions on those issues.  In our view, this is having a chilling effect on public discussion at the very time when we most need public discussion. 

Premier Christie Clark once promised a ban on cosmetic pesticides in BC, but the BC government is now promising laws that require that licensed pesticide applicators be hired for pesticide use for cosmetic purposes, "with some exceptions."  West Coast, the Canadian Cancer Society, the David Suzuki Foundation and a wide coalition of other organizations have repeatedly asked for a ban, and that's the approach that a large majority of British Columbians support.  With opposition parties championing a true ban, there’s every possibility that this could become an election issue in the near future.  And, frankly, the government’s promise to require home owners to hire licensed applicators may not satisfy anyone but the licensed applicators  and the pesticide companies.

Kudos to Greenpeace Canada for finding something of a smoking gun exposing  the role of the oil and gas industry in the gutting of Canada’s environmental laws.  Greenpeace has released a letter from the Energy Framework Initiative (EFI), representing every major oil and gas industry association, asking that the government undertake a major overhaul of six critical environmental statutes that inconvenienced the industry.  Five of the statutes have since been replaced or seen major amendments through the dismantling of our country’s environmental safety net s in omnibus bills C-38 and C-45, and further amendments are expected in the near future.  As we’ve said before, passing laws to placate one industry is going to mean bad laws that don’t protect Canadians.  In the short and long run chopping up Canada’s environmental safety net to placate industry harms our environment and the economy,and in the long run it undercuts the social licence of the industry. In the long run, everybody loses.

The decision of the Yukon Court of Appeal in Ross River Dena Council v. Government of the Yukon - delivered just days before the end of 2012 (on Dec 27th) – may force governments across Canada – including in BC – to rewrite their mining laws.  The decision essentially holds that the “free entry system” – a system of allocating mineral rights that is central to mining law in much of Canada, including BC – is inconsistent with the obligation of the Crown to consult First Nations on decisions that may impact their Aboriginal Title and Rights. 

Should hunting clubs be able to hold wolf-killing contests, with the intent to cull the wolf population? A legal opinion we prepared for Pacific Wild on the legality of a controversial wolf-kill contest is calling the legality of the contest into doubt, and escalating concerns about how we manage wildlife in BC.

First Nations in BC are playing a national leadership role in pushing back against the controversial Canada China Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (FIPPA), and are hooking up with some non-Aboriginal allies in that fight.  A press release issued today by the Union of BC Indian Chiefs (UBCIC), the Hupacasath First Nation, as well as Leadnow.ca and the Council of Canadians headlined challenges the Canadian government to deal honourably with First Nations before ratifying the Canada China FIPPA.